text:
We're going to switch gears now and take another look at the stock market. Last week about the same time, we talked about how the Dow has been hitting record highs, but did you know that stock ownership in this country is at record lows? According to a recent Gallup poll, only about half of Americans, 52 percent, now own stocks. That's the lowest level since Gallup started tracking that number back in 1998.
We wondered what, if anything, that means, so we've called, once again, upon one of our money coaches, Roben Farzad. He's a contributor to Bloomberg Businessweek and he's with us now. Welcome back. Thanks for joining us.
ROBEN FARZAD: My pleasure. How are you?
MARTIN: Good. Well, just to recap, we're seeing almost daily records on the Dow, the Dow Jones Industrial Average. I know that there's some dispute about whether that number really means anything, but what do you think that means?
FARZAD: I think, across the board, you're seeing markets in the United States hit highs, and it's not just the Dow. I think it illustrates writ large that the money is awash in the system. The Federal Reserve has this gigantic fire hose and it's splashing money onto the plain and, inevitably, it's going to make its way down to corporate balance sheets and especially when people can't really get an opportunity in their savings. Institutional investors have yields that are so low, they're going to chase return in the stock market, obviously.
MARTIN: Now, a lot of people think and, in fact, our guest last week said that even if you aren't in the market, this is good news for the average American. Do you agree?
FARZAD: It's good news. Psychologically, you get that ping on the nightly news, the Dow ends at another high today. The S&P, the NASDAQ at a 12 and a half year high. But it's not very comforting if you're not exposed to that. If you say, well, what if I didn't liquidate my 401K three, four years ago? What if I didn't take that hardship withdrawal? I'd actually feel the wealth that I get a brokerage statement now that shows that the balances are higher. It's a regretful incident when, in fact, you did have to sell out and, right now, you realize that, if you didn't, if you could have gotten funds somewhere else, you would be partaking in this rally financially.
MARTIN: Well, that was going to be my next question, which is why is it that the percentage of Americans who own stocks is at this point? And I should, you know, mention that, since 1998, you know, that's not a huge long period. The high of stock ownership in this country was 65 percent before the financial crisis hit. Now, 52 percent. That is a real number of people who are no longer in the market. So is it your view that that's mainly because of people who cashed out because they needed emergency funds and that's where they found their emergency funds?
FARZAD: I think they also got spooked in a market that was down 40 percent. You had a flash crash after that. It was very easy to say, gosh, the world is falling apart. The last thing I can depend on is this whimsical stock market. I'm getting out.
In addition to that, I could be foreclosed on. I could potentially lose my job. If I didn't lose my job, why am I not tapping this asset, be it in my brokerage account or my company sponsored 401K? And we saw that. We saw that in spades. We saw hardship withdrawals. We saw companies reporting that this was being done at a record clip. And very few people could have imagined that, in less than five years, the market would have round tripped back and been at an all time high right now.
MARTIN: Well, what is your - what would you have to say about why this matters? I mean, why do you think this is important for the country to think about? I mean, because, you know, the theory behind moving from defined benefit pensions to defined contribution plans, 401Ks, 403Bs, things like that is that people should have the right to decide, you know, how they use their money. If they feel that their money is better spent, say, paying off a mortgage or staying out of foreclosure, they should have the right to do that.
What's your theory or what do you have to say about why you think this matters, why it's important to talk about this?
FARZAD: Well, because we're on our own. As you described yourself, these are self-directed plans now. The company is, effectively, handing you a series of pamphlets for a mutual fund company and says, go and decide on your own. And you're free to pull out the money when you want to do it. You're free to not contribute when you want to do it. And, time and again, we see that the behavior is self-destructive. The investor thinks he's doing the right thing and getting out when the market is tanking and, right now, you see more and more investors who had the money sidelined want to get back in when the market is hitting an all-time high.
There's no - and I don't want to sound too paternalistic. There's no one out there necessarily guiding hands. There's no great financial coach at companies that will go out there and hold every individual investor's hand. And this matters because, increasingly, you're on your own. Increasingly, we don't know about the solvency of Social Security. You're going to need the market to help you, especially after your savings and retirement accounts have taken such a wallop in this great recession.
MARTIN: Do you feel that this is also going to have an effect on the equality or inequality of net worth? I mean, we often talk about sort of inequality of income, but the inequality of net worth of people, the kinds of assets that people have to live on later on. I guess what I'm asking is, do you think that there could be a problem down the road when people who are middle income have pulled out money out of the market and then, maybe 10 years from now, don't have enough to live on in retirement?
FARZAD: I absolutely think that's a problem and - yes - the stock market still remains the province of the wealthy or the upper classes who have access to the type of jobs, for example, that can give you a 401K plan, that have the disposable income to put in separate brokerage accounts and you've already seen such a widening of fortunes, a kind of a divergence of fortunes in this case. And it's only seen worse. I mean, the Gallup data showed how the 30 to 49 age group saw the biggest declines in equity ownership and unemployment disproportionately hits this group. Foreclosures disproportionately hits this group, so there's a lot of catching up to do and it's a quandary right now. Do you get back in when the market's at an all-time high? Do you even have money on the sidelines to get back in? There are no easy answers.
MARTIN: Another quote from the study. "While soaring stock values may be an incentive to jump back into the market, continued high unemployment appears to be acting as a barrier. Without a job, some Americans may simply be unable to afford stock investments while others may fear the market is still too risky as long as joblessness remains a national problem." End quote. Again, that's from the study. What do you say about that?
FARZAD: Yeah. I think it still speaks to the fact that this is an optional thing for investors to get back in the market. When you look at it, though, over time, you're going to need something to help you accelerate, to help you catch up with the self-inflicted damage of the past five or six years. Not just self-inflicted, again, Michel. A lot of this came from out of left field. It's the worst economic calamity of our lifetimes.
But, again, you have to be able to have something, an asset class that can keep up with inflation, that can keep up with the cost of living and do you something for retirement. And we've seen the market be that asset class, historically.
MARTIN: No more than a third of younger and lower income households are in the stock market, so a final thought, Roben. Younger Americans - do you think that there are implications for them?
FARZAD: Yeah, definitely. These are the years where it really matters, where you could really do yourself a big favor by being involved in the market, by - if you're single, if you have a job. If you're in a position to garnish something from your wages and put it in a 401K plan, that is where it could really compound and do great things for you and, if you're not, you're losing out on your 20s. It's definitely a great age to be there, to be diversified. And, unfortunately, these are the people who look back and, when they are of means, they're going to say, wow, I missed out on that time.
And I think this is where policymakers have to look more into financial education. You don't have people immediately out of college or people that age necessarily thinking that this is what I need to buck up and have some sort of financial self-determination. It's left to your HR provider at work to kind of tell you something or two about it.
MARTIN: If that person still is there. Roben Farzad is a contributor to Bloomberg Businessweek. He was with us from Richmond, Virginia. Roben, thanks so much for joining us once again.
FARZAD: Thank you, Michel. Take care.
MARTIN: Just ahead, Hollywood superstar Angelina Jolie is in the headlines by her own choice this time. Genetic testing showed she was at high risk for breast cancer, so she decided to have a double mastectomy to improve her odds and she wrote about it. We'll talk with one mother and daughter who face the same dilemma.
REGINA BRETT: As a parent, you don't want your children to go through anything. You'd take a bullet for them if you could and that day she found out she was positive, I just felt a real deep sadness.
MARTIN: Their gut-wrenching dilemma and the choices that came next. That's ahead on TELL ME MORE from NPR News. I'm Michel Martin.
(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC) Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.


text:
Editor's Note: Frida Ghitis is a world affairs columnist for The Miami Herald and World Politics Review. A former CNN producer and correspondent, she is the author of "The End of Revolution: A Changing World in the Age of Live Television." Follow her on Twitter: @FridaGColumns
Story highlights
Frida Ghitis: The U.S. will become the world's leading oil producer in a few years
Ghitis: It is truly transformational that the U.S. is giving up its addiction to foreign oil
Despite energy independence, we need to keep looking into green energy, she says
Ghitis: It's beneficial for the U.S. to not rely on unstable, undemocratic Middle East for oil
We pay a lot of attention to revolutions when they emerge suddenly and violently, but when a transformation arrives gradually and peacefully it's easy to miss.
Let's stop for a moment and take a look at a slow-motion development changing the world as we know it: The United States is giving up its addiction to foreign oil.
For decades, we bemoaned the awful toll this addiction has taken. The need for oil and natural gas – much of it from Middle Eastern dictatorships – shaped the foundation of global geopolitics. It created morally questionable alliances and repeatedly placed Washington in a position to choose between its fundamental values and its economic interests. Now all that could change.
When President Obama started his first term, the country faced stiff economic headwinds. Now, as he prepares to start his second term, the country enjoys a rare and unexpected tailwind, propelling it in one of the most important areas, with a host of positive implications.
Stay up to date on the latest opinion, analysis and conversations through social media. Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion and follow us @CNNOpinion on Twitter. We welcome your ideas and comments.
Clearly, the booming American oil and gas businesses are not problem-free, but the benefits – economic, geopolitical and environmental – of this impending energy independence far outweigh the drawbacks.
The days when Mideast oil-producing dictatorships and their friends at OPEC could so easily wave their power over a trembling, oil-thirsty West are on their way to becoming a relic of the past.
America still needs imported oil. But growing production and shrinking consumption have created a most promising trend. According to the International Energy Agency, the United States will become the world's leading oil producer in just a few years. Imagine that. The United States could produce more oil than Saudi Arabia as early as 2017 and become a net oil exporter by 2030.
And if you count other petroleum products, the future is already here. In 2011, the United States exported more petroleum products – including gasoline, diesel and other fuels – than it imported. That had not happened in more than half a century.
David Frum: A tax we could learn to love
The first major sign of impact is visible in Iran. The loosening of oil markets has strengthened the world's hand against oil-rich Iran. One main reason the international community has been able to impose strong sanctions on Tehran, aimed at persuading the regime to stop its illegal nuclear enrichment program, is that the global economy can do without Iranian oil. Iran's production has fallen 40%, a drop that not long ago would have created unacceptable economic hardships for the rest of the planet.
The trend is even more dramatic when you include natural gas, a product that is revolutionizing energy markets. The United States is about to become the second-largest exporter of natural gas behind Russia. Gigantic oil and gas finds in the United States and elsewhere are transforming the landscape, in some cases quite literally.
Other than rising oil prices, the reason for this shift is that new and controversial technologies such as fracking and horizontal drilling have multiplied the amount of viable deposits in unexpected places. The techniques take an environmental toll, but there are upsides.
Fracking, as we keep learning, is creating very troubling problems, which deserve scrutiny. But it is helping to replace coal, the dirtiest form of energy production, with much cleaner natural gas.
Another dark lining in this silver cloud is that cheaper oil and gas will reduce incentives to produce green energies. Rather than abandoning the new sources of energy, efforts should focus on finding ways to reduce the negative impact of fracking and on continuing the push for alternative energy.
Fracking protesters say drilling jobs not worth environmental risks
The Obama administration now faces a balancing act as it starts its new term. Energy policy, the quest for full energy independence, must be weighed against the growing threat of climate change.
A decision on the controversial Keystone XL pipeline is imminent and political pressure against fracking will grow. The president should support strong climate legislation, without reversing the powerful gains of surging U.S. oil and gas production, with all its transformational benefits. The two goals are not mutually exclusive.
Once upon a time, America was the Saudi Arabia of whale oil, the fuel of its day. Whale oil was displaced by hydrocarbon production, which the United States also dominated. That started changing with enormous geopolitical consequences after easy, high quality oil was found in the Arabian Peninsula and other parts of the Middle East.
The United States built alliances with autocratic regimes as part of a commitment to satisfy its needs and preserve the free flow of oil, which became the life-blood of the global economy.
For oil-rich countries, this brought enormous fortunes, but it also brought something known as the "resource curse." With wealth concentrated in the hands of autocrats, corruption mushroomed, and other sectors of the economy withered.
A trend away from the concentration of oil production in such an unstable, undemocratic part of the world bodes well. It bodes well for human rights, and it also bodes well, ironically, for the economies of oil-rich countries, which may at long last find an incentive to diversify into other industries. It certainly bodes well for the U.S. economy, which is already creating tens of thousands of jobs in industries related to the new boom.
William Bennett: Damon's film overlooks fracking's boon
In what sounds like something from another era, the Energy Information Administration forecast declining gasoline prices for the next few years. That's the first bit of good news for American consumers. The really good news is the knowledge that soon, every time you fill up your tank you will not be sending a piece of your paycheck to the Middle East.
That, among other things, is excellent news for America's balance of trade and for the soundness of the U.S. economy, which sadly now struggles with a politically dysfunctional Washington.
No matter how much oil the United States and its friends in the Western Hemisphere produce, the Middle East remains a principal global petroleum producer for the foreseeable future. The United States still needs to ensure the free flow of oil, because a stop in production will cause prices to spike on global markets, affecting the entire planet.
But America and its friends are becoming much less vulnerable to oil shocks. And supplies from other parts of the world are becoming more plentiful. The emerging changes in the world's energy markets, if they continue to develop, are nothing short of revolutionary.
As Obama prepares for a new term in office, they are gradually rerouting us from a destiny that we had thought was inescapable and rather dismal to one that, while far from assured, looks much more promising.
Follow us on Twitter @CNNOpinion
Join us on Facebook/CNNOpinion
The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frida Ghitis.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Service: Schrift, Schriften, font, fonts, typeface, typefaces, corporate type, custom type, Schriftbearbeitung, OpenType, OpenType Pro, editorial design
Viktor Nübel works as freelance graphic designer in Berlin.
He has studied social science before changing to graphic design. He has graduated from design akademie berlin with the thesis »Type Attack!«, which results in the typeface PTL Attack.
He has worked with MetaDesign, FSI FontShop International and for FontShop's international design conference TYPO Berlin.
Nowadays he works for agencies and clients of different fields, specialized in web design, logotypes, identities and type design.
PTL Attack, 2007
PTL Attack Rough, 2009
PTL Attention, 2012


text:
If your claim is denied, you will receive a denial letter with an explanation of the reason(s) your claim was denied. There are situations where the City may not be responsible or obligated to pay your claim. For example, there may be another party responsible for the claim, a contractor may be doing work for the City and the contractor may be obligated to pay the claim.
Show All Answers
You may submit a claim online or you may contact the Risk Management Division and request a claim form.
Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TMLIRP) is the City's insurance carrier. All liability claims are forwarded to TMLIRP by the City of Baytown's Risk Management Division. Once your claim has been received, TMLIRP will assign an adjuster to handle your claim. The adjuster will contact you in a few business days.
You must complete a claim form and return it to the City's Risk Management Division. You should hear from our insurance adjuster within a few business days.
Once a claim form is received by Risk Management, we will open a claim with our insurance carrier, the Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TMLIRP). If you do not hear from TMLIRP within 5 business days, you may contact them at 1-800-537-6655 or you may contact Risk Management at 281-420-5846.
No. Do not make repairs or incur other costs under the assumption that City will reimburse you when a claim is filed. Furthermore, you should not have repairs made or services performed and billed to the City. The City may settle a claim with you but it may not pay the costs of all the services that you ordered. The City also cannot approve a rental vehicle. That determination is made by Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TMLIRP). You may contact them at 1-800-537-6655 . It is our goal to address each claim as fairly and promptly as possible as we understand you may have been inconvenienced by this incident.
Depending on the complexity and the nature of your claim, it may take several days or weeks for the adjuster to conduct the investigation. An investigation may include a visit to the site for inspection and photographs, contact with the City Department or workers involved in the area or incident and follow up with you for additional information or documentation. Please allow a reasonable period of time to investigate and respond to your claim.
You will receive a written response to your claim from the assigned adjuster. Depending on the complexity and nature of your claim this may take several days or weeks. Should you have any questions or concerns about the results of their investigation or the status of your claim, please address these to the assigned adjuster or you may contact the Risk Management Division at 281-420-5846.
If your claim is valid and the City is legally obligated to pay, you will receive a letter advising you that your claim has been accepted. At this time the adjuster will advise you of the amount of the settlement and provide you with a Release of Claim Form. You must have your signature notarized and return the original Release to the assigned adjuster. Texas Municipal League Intergovernmental Risk Pool (TMLIRP) will send your settlement check.
The assigned adjuster will send you a claim acceptance letter with a Release of Claims Form which you must sign before a Notary Public and return the original to the adjuster. It may take several days after the receipt of your properly executed Release for the assigned adjuster to process your settlement check. Once you sign the Release and receive the settlement check your claim is concluded and is final.
Yes, the City often uses Independent Contractors and they may be responsible for damage they cause while performing work on behalf of the City. If an Independent Contractor is responsible for your damage, the assigned adjuster will provide you the name of the Independent Contractor.


text:
Education experts will soon be examining applications from public schools districts across Kentucky that want to become "Districts of Innovation."
The Kentucky Education Department says the designation allows the districts to seek exemption from some rules and regulations to try to improve student learning.
The idea is to let school districts change the way they teach and students learn with initiatives such as competency-based learning and a modified school schedule.
Seventeen districts submitted applications for the designation. Staff from the Education Department, the Education Professional Standards Board and the Regional Education Laboratory that serves Kentucky will review the applications in May and make recommendations to the Kentucky Board of Education. The board will select the districts June 5.
Districts could begin implementing plans as early as the coming school year.


text:
LispWorks CLOS essentially supports the metaobject protocol described in chapters 5 & 6 of The Art of the Metaobject Protocol (Kiczales, des Rivières & Bobrow, The MIT Press, 1991). Throughout the LispWorks documentation, "AMOP" refers to this book. Users might find it helpful to refer to the relevant chapters online at
All the LispWorks MOP symbols are in the
There are some discrepancies between LispWorks and AMOP, which are described in this Chapter.
This Chapter also describes some common problems encountered by programmers using the MOP.


text:
The Doha Declaration explained
The November 2001 declaration of the Fourth Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, provides the mandate for negotiations on a range of subjects, and other work including issues concerning the implementation of the present agreements.
The negotiations take place in the Trade Negotiations Committee and its subsidiaries. Other work under the work programme takes place in other WTO councils and committees.
This is an unofficial explanation of what the declaration mandates.
> implementation
> agriculture
> services
> market
access (non-agriculture)
> intellectual
> investment
> competition
> transparency
in government procurement
> trade
> anti-dumping
> subsidies
> regional
> dispute
> environment
> e-commerce
> small
> trade,
debt and finance
> trade
and technology transfer
> technical
> least-developed
> special
and differential treatment
The 21 subjects listed in the Doha Declaration (and the paragraphs that refer to them). Most of these involve negotiations; other work includes actions under implementation, analysis and monitoring:
back to top
Implementation-related issues and
(par 12) >
Implementation is short-hand for problems raised particularly by developing countries about the implementation of the current WTO Agreements, i.e. the agreements arising from the Uruguay Round negotiations.
In Doha this important question was handled in two ways. First, ministers agreed to adopt around 50 decisions clarifying the obligations of developing country member governments with respect to issues including agriculture, subsidies, textiles and clothing, technical barriers to trade, trade-related investment measures and rules of origin.
Agreement on these points required hard bargaining between negotiators over the course of nearly three years.
Many other implementation issues of concern to developing countries have not been settled, however. For these issues, Ministers agreed in Doha on a future work programme for addressing these matters.
In paragraph 12 of the Ministerial Declaration, ministers underscored that they had taken a decision on the 50 or so measures in a separate ministerial document (the 14 November 2001 decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns) and pointed out that negotiations on outstanding implementation issues shall be an integral part of the Work Programme in the coming years.
The ministers established a two-track approach. Those issues for which there was an agreed negotiating mandate in the declaration would be dealt with under the terms of that mandate.
Those implementation issues where there is no mandate to negotiate, would be the taken up as a matter of priority by relevant WTO councils and committees. These bodies are to report on their progress to the Trade Negotiations Committee by the end of 2002 for appropriate action.
> Implementation decision explained
> Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health
> Implementation-related issues and concerns — Decision
> Subsidies — procedures for extensions under Article 27.4 (of the Subsidies and Countervailing Measures Agreement) for certain developing country members
> Decision on waiver for EU-ACP Partnership Agreement
> Decision on EU transitional regime for banana imports
See also
> How
the negotiations are organized
> Implementation
(par 13, 14) >
Negotiations on agriculture began in early 2000, under Article 20 of the WTO Agriculture Agreement. By November 2001 and the Doha Ministerial Conference, 121 governments had submitted a large number of negotiating proposals.
These negotiations will continue, but now with the mandate given by the Doha Declaration, which also includes a series of deadlines. The declaration builds on the work already undertaken, confirms and elaborates the objectives, and sets a timetable. Agriculture is now part of the single undertaking in which virtually all the linked negotiations are to end by 1 January 2005.
The declaration reconfirms the long-term objective already agreed in the present WTO Agreement: to establish a fair and market-oriented trading system through a programme of fundamental reform. The programme encompasses strengthened rules, and specific commitments on government support and protection for agriculture. The purpose is to correct and prevent restrictions and distortions in world agricultural markets.
Without prejudging the outcome, member governments commit themselves to comprehensive negotiations aimed at:
- market access: substantial reductions
- exports subsidies: reductions of, with a view to phasing out, all forms of these
- domestic support: substantial reductions for supports that distort trade
The declaration makes special and differential treatment for developing countries integral throughout the negotiations, both in countries' new commitments and in any relevant new or revised rules and disciplines. It says the outcome should be effective in practice and should enable developing countries meet their needs, in particular in food security and rural development.
The ministers also take note of the non-trade concerns (such as environmental protection, food security, rural development, etc) reflected in the negotiating proposals already submitted. They confirm that the negotiations will take these into account, as provided for in the Agriculture Agreement.
> current
> more on agriculture
Key dates: agriculture
Start: early 2000
"Framework" agreed: 1 August 2004.
Formulas and other "modalities" for countries' commitments: originally 31 March 2003, now by 6th Ministerial Conference, 2005 (in Hong Kong, China)
Countries' comprehensive draft commitments and stock taking : originally by 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially by end of 2006, part of single undertaking
(par 15) >
Negotiations on services were already almost two years old when they were incorporated into the new Doha agenda.
The WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) commits member governments to undertake negotiations on specific issues and to enter into successive rounds of negotiations to progressively liberalize trade in services. The first round had to start no later than five years from 1995.
Accordingly, the services negotiations started officially in early 2000 under the Council for Trade in Services. In March 2001, the Services Council fulfilled a key element in the negotiating mandate by establishing the negotiating guidelines and procedures.
The Doha Declaration endorses the work already done, reaffirms the negotiating guidelines and procedures, and establishes some key elements of the timetable including, most importantly, the deadline for concluding the negotiations as part of a single undertaking.
The negotiations take place in "special sessions" of the Services Council and regular meetings of its relevant subsidiary committees or working parties.
> current
> more on services
Key dates: services
Start: early 2000
Negotiating guidelines and procedures: March 2001
Initial requests for market access: by 30 June 2002
Initial offers of market access: by 31 March 2003
Stock taking: originally 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Revised market-access offers: by 31 May 2005
Deadline: originally by 1 January2005, now unofficially end of 2006, part of single undertaking
Market access for non-agricultural products
(par 16) >
The ministers agreed to launch tariff-cutting negotiations on all non-agricultural products. The aim is "to reduce, or as appropriate eliminate tariffs, including the reduction or elimination of tariff peaks, high tariffs, and tariff escalation, as well as non-tariff barriers, in particular on products of export interest to developing countries". These negotiations shall take fully into account the special needs and interests of developing and least-developed countries, and recognize that these countries do not need to match or reciprocate in full tariff-reduction commitments by other participants.
At the start, participants have to reach agreement on how ("modalities") to conduct the tariff-cutting exercise (in the Tokyo Round, the participants used an agreed mathematical formula to cut tariffs across the board; in the Uruguay Round, participants negotiated cuts product by product). The agreed procedures would include studies and capacity-building measures that would help least-developed countries participate effectively in the negotiations. Back in Geneva, negotiators decided that the "modalities" should be agreed by 31 May 2003. When that date was missed, members agreed on 1 August 2004 on a new target: the Hong Kong Ministerial Conference in December 2005.
While average customs duties are now at their lowest levels after eight GATT Rounds, certain tariffs continue to restrict trade, especially on exports of developing countries — for instance "tariff peaks", which are relatively high tariffs, usually on "sensitive" products, amidst generally low tariff levels. For industrialized countries, tariffs of 15% and above are generally recognized as "tariff peaks".
Another example is "tariff escalation", in which higher import duties are applied on semi-processed products than on raw materials, and higher still on finished products. This practice protects domestic processing industries and discourages the development of processing activity in the countries where raw materials originate.
The negotiations take place in a Market Access Negotiating Group.
> current
> more on market access
> GATT and
the Goods Council
Key dates: market access
Start: January 2002
Stock taking: 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially by end 2006, part of single undertaking
Trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights
(pars 17–19) >
TRIPS and public health. In the declaration, ministers stress that it is important to implement and interpret the TRIPS Agreement in a way that supports public health — by promoting both access to existing medicines and the creation of new medicines. They refer to their separate declaration on this subject.
This separate declaration on TRIPS and public health is designed to respond to concerns about the possible implications of the TRIPS Agreement for access to medicines.
It emphasizes that the TRIPS Agreement does not and should not prevent member governments from acting to protect public health. It affirms governments' right to use the agreement's flexibilities in order to avoid any reticence the governments may feel.
The separate declaration clarifies some of the forms of flexibility available, in particular compulsory licensing and parallel importing. (For an explanation of these issues, go to the main TRIPS pages on the WTO website)
For the Doha agenda, this separate declaration sets two specific task. The TRIPS Council has to find a solution to the problems countries may face in making use of compulsory licensing if they have too little or no pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity, reporting to the General Council on this by the end of 2002.(this was achieved in August, 2003, see intellectual property section of the "Agreements" chapter.) The declaration also extends the deadline for least-developed countries to apply provisions on pharmaceutical patents until 1 January 2016.
Geographical indications — the registration system. Geographical indications are place names (in some countries also words associated with a place) used to identify products with particular characteristics because they come from specific places. The WTO TRIPS Council has already started work on a multilateral registration system for geographical indications for wines and spirits. The Doha Declaration sets a deadline for completing the negotiations: the Fifth Ministerial Conference in 2003.
These negotiations take place in "special sessions" of the TRIPS Council.
Geographical indications — extending the "higher level of protection" to other products. The TRIPS Agreement provides a higher level of protection to geographical indications for wines and spirits. This means they should be protected even if there is no risk of misleading consumers or unfair competition. A number of countries want to negotiate extending this higher level to other products. Others oppose the move, and the debate in the TRIPS Council has included the question of whether the relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement provide a mandate for extending coverage beyond wines and spirits.
The Doha Declaration notes that the TRIPS Council will handle this under the declaration's paragraph 12 (which deals with implementation issues). Paragraph 12 offers two tracks: "(a) where we provide a specific negotiating mandate in this Declaration, the relevant implementation issues shall be addressed under that mandate; (b) the other outstanding implementation issues shall be addressed as a matter of priority by the relevant WTO bodies, which shall report to the Trade Negotiations Committee [TNC], established under paragraph 46 below, by the end of 2002 for appropriate action."
In papers circulated at the Ministerial Conference, member governments expressed different interpretations of this mandate.
Argentina said it understands "there is no agreement to negotiate the 'other outstanding implementation issues' referred to under (b) and that, by the end of 2002, consensus will be required in order to launch any negotiations on these issues".
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, EU, Hungary, India, Liechtenstein, Kenya, Mauritius, Nigeria, Pakistan, the Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Thailand and Turkey argued that there is a clear mandate to negotiate immediately.
Reviews of TRIPS provisions. Two reviews have been taking place in the TRIPS Council, as required by the TRIPS Agreement: a review of Article 27.3(b) which deals with patentability or non-patentability of plant and animal inventions, and the protection of plant varieties; and a review of the entire TRIPS Agreement (required by Article 71.1).
The Doha Declaration says that work in the TRIPS Council on these reviews or any other implementation issue should also look at: the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the UN Convention on Biodiversity; the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore; and other relevant new developments that member governments raise in the review of the TRIPS Agreement. It adds that the TRIPS Council's work on these topics is to be guided by the TRIPS Agreement's objectives (Article 7) and principles (Article 8), and must take development fully into account.
Key dates: intellectual property
Report to the General Council — solution on compulsory licensing and lack of pharmaceutical production capacity: originally by end of 2002, decision agreed 30 April 2003.
Report to TNC — action on outstanding implementation issues under par 12: by end of 2002 (missed)
Deadline — negotiations on geographical indications registration system (wines and spirits): by 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) (missed)
Deadline — negotiations specifically mandated in Doha Declaration: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially by end 2006
Least-developed countries to apply pharmaceutical patent provisions: 2016
Relationship between trade and investment
(pars 20–22) >
This is a "Singapore issue" i.e. a working group set up by the 1996 Singapore Ministerial Conference has been studying it.
In the period up to the 2003 Ministerial Conference, the declaration instructs the working group to focus on clarifying the scope and definition of the issues, transparency, non-discrimination, ways of preparing negotiated commitments, development provisions, exceptions and balance-of-payments safeguards, consultation and dispute settlement. The negotiated commitments would be modelled on those made in services, which specify where commitments are being made — "positive lists" — rather than making broad commitments and listing exceptions.
The declaration also spells out a number of principles such as the need to balance the interests of countries where foreign investment originates and where it is invested, countries' right to regulate investment, development, public interest and individual countries' specific circumstances. It also emphasizes support and technical cooperation for developing and least-developed countries, and coordination with other international organizations such as the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).
Since the 1 August 2004 decision, this subject has been dropped from the Doha agenda.
> statement: chairman's understanding of the
mandate ...
> more
on trade and investment
Key dates: trade and investment
Continuing work in working group with defined agenda: to 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Negotiations: after 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) subject to "explicit consensus" on modalities with deadline: by 1 January 2005, part of single undertaking. But no consensus; dropped from Doha agenda in 1 August 2004 decision
Interaction between trade and competition
(pars 23–25) >
This is another "Singapore issue", with a working group set up in 1996 to study the subject.
In the period up to the 2003 Ministerial Conference, the declaration instructs the working group to focus on clarifying:
- core principles including transparency, non-discrimination and procedural fairness, and provisions on "hardcore" cartels (i.e. cartels that are formally set up)
- ways of handling voluntary cooperation on competition policy among WTO member governments
- support for progressive reinforcement of competition institutions in developing countries through capacity building
The declaration says the work must take full account of developmental needs. It includes technical cooperation and capacity building, on such topics as policy analysis and development, so that developing countries are better placed to evaluate the implications of closer multilateral cooperation for various developmental objectives. Cooperation with other organizations such as the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) is also included.
Since the 1 August 2004 decision, this subject has been dropped from the Doha agenda.
> statement: chairman's understanding of the
mandate ...
> more on
competition policy
Key dates: trade and competition policy
Continuing work in working group with defined agenda: to 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Negotiations: after 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) subject to "explicit consensus" on modalities with deadline: by 1 January 2005, part of single undertaking. But no consensus; dropped from Doha agenda in 1 August 2004 decision
Transparency in government
(par 26) >
A third "Singapore issue" that was handled by a working group set up by the Singapore Ministerial Conference in 1996.
The Doha Declaration says that the "negotiations shall be limited to the transparency aspects and therefore will not restrict the scope for countries to give preferences to domestic supplies and suppliers" — it is separate from the plurilateral Government Procurement Agreement.
The declaration also stresses development concerns, technical assistance and capacity building.
Since the 1 August 2004 decision, this subject has been dropped from the Doha agenda.
> statement: chairman's understanding of the
mandate ...
> more on
transparency in government procurement
Key dates: government procurement (transparency)
Continuing work in working group with defined agenda: to 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Negotiations: after 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) subject to "explicit consensus" on modalities with deadline: by 1 January 2005, part of single undertaking. But no consensus; dropped from Doha agenda in 1 August 2004 Decision.
Trade facilitation
(par 27) >
A fourth "Singapore issue" kicked off by the 1996 Ministerial Conference.
The declaration recognizes the case for "further expediting the movement, release and clearance of goods, including goods in transit, and the need for enhanced technical assistance and capacity building in this area".
In the period until the Fifth Ministerial Conference in 2003, the WTO Goods Council, which had been working on this subject since 1997, "shall review and as appropriate, clarify and improve relevant aspects of Articles 5 ('Freedom of Transit'), 8 ('Fees and Formalities Connected with Importation and Exportation') and 10 ('Publication and Administration of Trade Regulations') of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT 1994) and identify the trade facilitation needs and priorities of Members, in particular developing and least-developed countries".
Those issues were cited in the 1 August 2004 decision that broke the Cancún deadlock. Members agreed to start negotiations on trade facilitation, but not the three other Singapore issues.
> statement: chairman's understanding of the
mandate ...
> more
on trade facilitation
Key dates: trade facilitation
Continuing work in Goods Council with defined agenda: to 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Negotiations: after 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) subject to "explicit consensus" on modalities, agreed in 1 August 2004 Decision.
Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially end of 2006, part of single undertaking
WTO rules: anti-dumping and subsidies
(par 28) >
The ministers agreed to negotiations on the Anti-Dumping (GATT Article 6) and Subsidies agreements. The aim is to clarify and improve disciplines while preserving the basic, concepts, principles of these agreements, and taking into account the needs of developing and least-developed participants.
In overlapping negotiating phases, participants first indicated which provisions of these two agreements they think should be the subject of clarification and improvement in the next phase of negotiations. The ministers mention specifically fisheries subsidies as one sector important to developing countries and where participants should aim to clarify and improve WTO disciplines.
Negotiations take place in the Rules Negotiating Group.
> current
> more on
> more on
> more
on fisheries subsidies
Key dates: anti-dumping, subsidies
Start: January 2002
Stock taking: 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially end of 2006, part of single undertaking
WTO rules: regional trade agreements
(par 29) >
Regional trade agreements (RTAs) are an important derogation to the WTO's most-favoured nation (MFN) rule, the principle of not discriminating between trading partners. All member governments are currently parties to RTAs.
RTAs have to meet certain conditions to be authorized to derogate from the MFN principle. But interpreting these rules has proved controversial. That has hindered the task of WTO members in assessing the compatibility of individual trade agreements with WTO provisions.
The Doha Declaration mandates negotiations aimed at "clarifying and improving disciplines and procedures under the existing WTO provisions applying to regional trade agreements. The negotiations shall take into account the developmental aspects of regional trade agreements."
With regard to WTO procedures relating to RTAs, WTO members have focused on improving transparency in RTAs. Negotiators developed a Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements, adopted on a provisional basis in December 2006 by the General Council.
At the 10th Ministerial Conference in Nairobi, ministers instructed WTO members to continue their work on RTAs. More information on this can be found here.
Negotiations take place in the Rules Negotiating Group.
> current
> more
on regional trade agreements
Key dates: regional trade
Start: January 2002
Stock taking: 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico) and 6th Ministerial Conference, 2005 (in Hong Kong, China)
First result: in December 2006, the General Council adopted a Decision establishing on a provisional basis the Transparency Mechanism for Regional Trade Agreements Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, currently no deadline.
Deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, currently no deadline.
Further developments: 10th Ministerial Conference, 2015 (in Kenya)
Dispute Settlement Understanding
(par 30) >
The 1994 Marrakesh Ministerial Conference mandated WTO member governments to conduct a review of the Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU, the WTO agreement on dispute settlement) within four years of the entry into force of the WTO Agreement (i.e. by 1 January 1999).
The Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) started the review in late 1997, and held a series of informal discussions on the basis of proposals and issues that members identified. Many, if not all, members clearly felt that improvements should be made to the understanding. However, the DSB could not reach a consensus on the results of the review.
The Doha Declaration mandates negotiations and states (in par 47) that these will not be part of the single undertaking — i.e. that they will not be tied to the overall success or failure of the other negotiations mandated by the declaration. Originally set to conclude by May 2003, the negotiations are continuing without a deadline.
> more on Dispute Settlement Understanding negotiations
Key dates: disputes understanding
Start: January 2002
Deadline: originally by May 2003, currently no deadline, separate from single undertaking
Trade and environment
(pars 31–33) >
New negotiations
Multilateral environmental agreements. Ministers agreed to launch negotiations on the relationship between existing WTO rules and specific trade obligations set out in multilateral environmental agreements. The negotiations will address how WTO rules are to apply to WTO members that are parties to environmental agreements, in particular to clarify the relationship between trade measures taken under the environmental agreements and WTO rules.
So far no measure affecting trade taken under an environmental agreement has been challenged in the GATT-WTO system.
Information exchange. Ministers agreed to negotiate procedures for regular information exchange between secretariats of multilateral environmental agreements and the WTO. Currently, the Trade and Environment Committee holds an information session with different secretariats of the multilateral environmental agreements once or twice a year to discuss the trade-related provisions in these environmental agreements and also their dispute settlement mechanisms. The new information exchange procedures may expand the scope of existing cooperation.
Observer status. Overall, the situation concerning the granting of observer status in the WTO to other international governmental organizations is currently blocked for political reasons. The negotiations aim to develop criteria for observership in WTO.
Trade barriers on environmental goods and services. Ministers also agreed to negotiations on the reduction or elimination of tariff and non-tariff barriers to environmental goods and services. Examples of environmental goods and services are catalytic converters, air filters or consultancy services on wastewater management.
Fisheries subsidies. Ministers agreed to clarify and improve WTO rules that apply to fisheries subsidies. The issue of fisheries subsidies has been studied in the Trade and Environment Committee for several years. Some studies demonstrate these subsidies can be environmentally damaging if they lead to too many fishermen chasing too few fish.
Negotiations on these issues, including concepts of what are the relevant environmental goods and services, take place in "special sessions" of the Trade and Environment Committee. Negotiations on market access for environmental goods and services take place in the Market Access Negotiating Group and Services Council "special sessions".
Work in the committee back to top
Ministers instructed the Trade and Environment Committee, in pursuing work on all items on its agenda, to pay particular attention to the following areas:
- The effect of environmental measures on market access, especially for developing countries.
- "Win-win-win" situations: when eliminating or reducing trade restrictions and distortions would benefit trade, the environment and development.
- Intellectual property. Paragraph 19 of the Ministerial Declaration mandates the TRIPs Council to continue clarifying the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Biological Diversity Convention. Ministers also ask the Trade and Environment Committee to continue to look at the relevant provisions of the TRIPS agreement.
- Environmental labelling requirements. The Trade and Environment Committee is to look at the impact of eco-labelling on trade and examine whether existing WTO rules stand in the way of eco-labelling policies. Parallel discussions are to take place in the Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.
- For all these issues: when working on these (market access, "win-win-win" situations, intellectual property and environmental labelling), the Trade and Environment Committee should identify WTO rules that would need to be clarified.
- General: ministers recognize the importance of technical assistance and capacity building programmes for developing countries in the trade and environment area. They also encourage members to share expertise and experience on national environmental reviews.
> more on trade and environment
Key dates: environment
Committee reports to ministers: 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Negotiations stock taking: 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Negotiations deadline: originally by 1 January 2005, now unofficially end of 2006, part of single undertaking
Electronic commerce
(par 34) >
The Doha Declaration endorses the work already done on electronic commerce and instructs the General Council to consider the most appropriate institutional arrangements for handling the work programme, and to report on further progress to the Fifth Ministerial Conference.
The declaration on electronic commerce from the Second Ministerial Conference in Geneva, 1998, said that WTO members will continue their practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions. The Doha Declaration states that members will continue this practice until the Fifth Ministerial Conference.
Key date: electronic commerce
Report on further progress: 5th Ministerial Conference, 2003 (in Mexico)
Small economies
(par 35) >
Small economies face specific challenges in their participation in world trade, for example lack of economy of scale or limited natural resources.
The Doha Declaration mandates the General Council to examine these problems and to make recommendations to the next Ministerial Conference as to what trade-related measures could improve the integration of small economies.
> more on Committee on Trade and Development
Key date: small economies
Recommendations: 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Trade, debt and finance
(par 36) >
Many developing countries face serious external debt problems and have been through financial crises. WTO ministers decided in Doha to establish a Working Group on Trade, Debt and Finance to look at how trade-related measures can contribute to find a durable solution to these problems. This working group will report to the General Council which will in turn report to the next Ministerial Conference.
> more on Committee on Trade and Development
Key date: debt and finance
General Council report: 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Trade and technology transfer
(par 37) >
A number of provisions in the WTO agreements mention the need for a transfer of technology to take place between developed and developing countries.
However, it is not clear how such a transfer takes place in practice and if specific measures might be taken within the WTO to encourage such flows of technology.
WTO ministers decided in Doha to establish a working group to examine the issue. The working group will report to the General Council which itself will report to the next Ministerial Conference.
> more on Committee on Trade and Development
Key date: technology transfer
General Council report: 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Technical cooperation and capacity
(pars 38–41) >
Through various paragraphs of the Doha Declaration, WTO member governments have made new commitments on technical cooperation and capacity building.
For example, the section on the relationship between trade and investment includes a call (par 21) for enhanced support for technical assistance and capacity building in this area.
Within the specific heading "technical cooperation and capacity building", paragraph 41 lists all the references to commitments on technical cooperation within the Doha Declaration: paragraphs 16 (market access for non-agricultural products), 21 (trade and investment), 24 (trade and competition policy), 26 (transparency in government procurement), 27 (trade facilitation), 33 (environment), 38-40 (technical cooperation and capacity building), 42 and 43 (least-developed countries). (Paragraph 2 in the preamble is also cited.)
Under this heading (i.e. pars 38-41), WTO member governments reaffirm all technical cooperation and capacity building commitments made throughout the declaration and add general commitments:
- The Secretariat, in coordination with other relevant agencies, is to encourage WTO developing-country members to consider trade as a main element for reducing poverty and to include trade measures in their development strategies.
- The agenda set out in the Doha Declaration gives priority to small, vulnerable, and transition economies, as well as to members and observers that do not have permanent delegations in Geneva.
- Technical assistance must be delivered by the WTO and other relevant international organizations within a coherent policy framework.
The Director-General reported to the General Council in December 2002 and to the Fifth Ministerial Conference on the implementation and adequacy of these new commitments.
Following the declaration's instructions to develop a plan ensuring long-term funding for WTO technical assistance, the General Council adopted on 20 December 2001 (one month after the Doha conference) a new budget that increased technical assistance funding by 80% and established a Doha Development Agenda Global Trust Fund. The fund now has an annual budget of 24 million Swiss francs.
> more on WTO assistance for developing countries
Key dates: technical cooperation
Technical assistance funding raised 80%; Development Agenda Global Trust Fund set up: December 2001
Director-General reports to General Council: December 2002
Director-General reports to ministers: 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Least-developed countries
(pars 42, 43) >
Many developed countries have now significantly decreased or actually scrapped tariffs on imports from least-developed countries (LDCs).
In the Doha declaration, WTO member governments commit themselves to the objective of duty-free, quota-free market access for LDCs' products and to consider additional measures to improve market access for these exports.
Members also agree to try to ensure that least-developed countries can negotiate WTO membership faster and more easily.
Some technical assistance is targeted specifically for least-developed countries. The Doha Declaration urges WTO member donors to significantly increase their contributions.
In addition, the Sub-Committee for LDCs (a subsidiary body of the WTO Committee on Trade and Development) designed a work programme un February 2002, as instructed by the Doha Declaration, taking into account the parts of the declaration related to trade that was issued at the UN LDC Conference.
> more on
Sub-Committee on Least-Developed Countries
> more on WTO assistance for developing
Key date: least-developed countries
Reports to: General Council: July 2002, 5th and 6th Ministerial Conferences, 2003 and 2005 (in Mexico and Hong Kong, China)
Special and differential treatment
(par 44) >
The WTO agreements contain special provisions which give developing countries special rights. These special provisions include, for example, longer time periods for implementing agreements and commitments or measures to increase trading opportunities for developing countries.
In the Doha Declaration, member governments agree that all special and differential treatment provisions should be reviewed with a view to strengthening them and making them more precise.
More specifically, the declaration (together with the Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns) mandates the Trade and Development Committee to identify which of those special and differential treatment provisions are mandatory, and to consider the implications of making mandatory those which are currently non-binding.
The Decision on Implementation-Related Issues and Concerns instructed the committee to make its recommendations for the General Council before July 2002. But because members needed more time, this was postponed to the end of July 2005.
> more on special and differential treatment provisions
Key date: special and differential treatment
Recommendations to General Council: July 2002, July 2005
Organization and management of the work
> details ...


text:
The study, reported in Cancer Cell, found that the EZH2 protein the drug agents inhibited is a powerful regulatory molecule in B-cells, and a key driver of cancer in these immune cells.
The study's lead investigator, Weill Cornell Medical College's Dr. Ari Melnick, suggests that combining an EZH2 inhibitor with another related targeted therapy may offer a much improved treatment for follicular lymphoma, a cancer that currently has no cure, as well as a non-toxic alternative to chemotherapy for at least a third of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas. Because these two lymphomas account for 70 percent of adult lymphomas, Dr. Melnick believes the new therapy could potentially help a broad cross section of lymphoma patients.
"Our research indicates that these inhibitors will be remarkably effective. I am very optimistic," says Dr. Melnick, the Gebroe Professor of Hematology/Oncology, professor of medicine and director of the Raymond and Beverly Sackler Center for Biomedical and Physical Sciences at Weill Cornell. "Researchers had thought EZH2 inhibitors would only help patients with a mutation in their EZH2 gene, which represents a small subset of lymphoma patients. What we found is that a majority of lymphomas turn out to be dependent on normal EZH2, not just mutated EZH2."
Tumor Cells Depend on the EZH2 Master Regulator
The new study was aimed at understanding what normal as well as mutated EZH2 does within B-cells — basic information that remained unknown despite more than a decade of research into the protein.
The role of B-cells (white blood cells known as B-lymphocytes) is to produce antibodies against invading microbes. What the researchers discovered is that EZH2 is required in order for the immune system to generate germinal center B-cells, which are the cells that make the most powerful type of antibodies.
Germinal center B-cells divide extremely quickly and try to create within them the high affinity antibodies that will be beneficial to fight off invading infections. This process happens constantly because of our exposure to microorganisms.
"Most B-cell lymphomas arise from germinal center B-cells — germinal centers are the engine for formation of lymphomas," says Dr. Melnick. "The reason for this is because germinal center B-cells divide very, very quickly while at the same time mutating their antibody genes. Unfortunately, many other genes get mutated when this happens, which can eventually result in lymphoma formation."
It turns out that the behavior of germinal center B-cell is orchestrated by EZH2, Dr. Melnick discovered. "EZH2 is a master regulator protein that turns off the brakes that prevent cell division, so it allows cells to divide without stopping," he says.
EZH2 also has a second function, which Dr. Melnick calls "surprising and perhaps even more important. It prevents germinal cells from transitioning to antibody-secreting cells," he says. "Indeed, in the normal immune system EZH2 prevents B-cells from exiting germinal centers so that these cells can continue to undergo sustained rapid cell division, which continues until the immune system says to stop. Then EZH2 goes away, and B-cells can develop into antibody-secreting cells, which send antibodies into the circulation to fight off infection."
Interestingly, mutations of EZH2 cause it to be even more efficient at promoting germinal center B-cell division and permanently keep them locked in this behavior, Dr. Melnick says. But he adds that most lymphomas that are derived from germinal cell B-cells are dependent on EZH2, whether normal or mutated, to sustain growth.
"Germinal center cells absolutely require EZH2 and the lymphomas that arise from germinal center cells inherit that need regardless of whether they have mutations," Dr. Melnick says. "We discovered that it is not just the small percentage of patients with EZH2 mutations who are candidates for these inhibitors. It is actually most of the lymphomas that originate from germinal center B-cells — and that represents the majority of patients."
The researchers report the development of a novel and highly specific EZH2 inhibitor, tested its effects against large panels of lymphoma cells and found that it works particularly well against germinal center-derived lymphomas regardless of whether or not they have EZH2 mutations.
"The case of EZH2 exemplifies a critically important emerging concept in cancer — that tumor cells are dependent on the master regulators that are required to sustain the normal cell type from which they originate," Dr. Melnick adds.
According to researchers, another implication of the study is that it may be possible to combine an EZH2 inhibitor with a drug that targets BCL2, which is also in clinical testing, to achieve a more powerful synergistic effect.
"EZH2 and BCL2 mutations tend to occur together in germinal center derived lymphomas. In our report, we show that indeed these two genes cooperate to drive lymphoma formation from germinal center B-cells, and so a combination therapy that inhibits both genes might offer a very powerful therapy," says Dr. Melnick. "Indeed, combining EZH2 inhibitors and BCL2 inhibitors had a much greater effect in cells and in animal models of lymphomas than either drug alone." These results pave the way for translation of combinatorial-targeted therapy for patients with incurable lymphomas.
source : http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130513152838.htm


text:
Family Courts Implicated in Infants' Murders
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE February 10, 2010
Contacts: Rita Smith, NCADV 303-839-1852 ext. 105
Kathleen Russell, CJE 415-250-1180
Family Courts Implicated in Infants' Murders
Two Young Boys Killed by Two Divorcing Dads in Past 10 Days
Points to Massive System Failure
SAN RAFAEL- National and local advocacy groups are expressing outrage over what has become a disturbing national trend of divorcing Dads killing their children and themselves.
8-month-old baby Bekm was shot and killed by his father, Nicholas Bacon, in Meridian, Idaho just 48 hours ago, while 9-month-old baby Wyatt was killed by his father Stephen Garcia just ten days ago in San Bernardino County. Details are still emerging about the tragic Idaho murder-suicide of baby Bekm on Monday night.
In the Garcia case, three different judges refused multiple requests by the child's mother for restraining orders to protect her child, despite police reports and documented death threats by the father in text messages and on Facebook.
"The system failed Wyatt Garcia and Katie Tagle,'' said California Assemblymember Jim Beall, Jr., the lead sponsor of Assembly Bill 612, which aims to prevent the use of non-scientific theories in California family courts. "Wyatt's tragic death was completely avoidable."
Numerous sources report a significant spike in murder suicides across the country by violent fathers who kill their children and themselves, frequently after mothers' requests for protection of their children are denied by family court judges. In addition, the Leadership Council on Child Abuse & Interpersonal Violence estimates that more than 58,000 children per year in America are ordered by family courts into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce.
"The time has come for us as a society to speak out and put a stop to this growing national body count. Across the country, women and children are being killed because of judges' personal biases and junk science that tells them to disbelieve women's legitimate claims and evidence of abuse," said Rita Smith, the Executive Director of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
According to court transcripts and eyewitness accounts, judges reacted with disbelief when mother Katie Tagle presented them with evidence of death threats against her son by the father.
Judge David Mazurek stated, "I get concerned when there's a pending child custody and visitation issue and in between that, one party or the other claims that there's some violence in between. It raises the court's eyebrows because based on my experience, it's a way for one party to try to gain an advantage over the other," he said.
"This attitude permeates the courts, that women are lying about the danger they are in," said Kathleen Russell from the Center for Judicial Excellence. "This attitude causes judges to ignore tangible evidence of death threats and abuse. The abusers' lobby has convinced judges that shared custody is always the answer, and sadly, this case points out how deadly that approach can be," she said.
According to a family member who was in the courtroom when Ms. Tagle last sought protection for her son, the judge reportedly said, "One of you is lying, and I think it's you," while pointing at Katie. Transcripts from this hearing are not yet available.
The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and the Center for Judicial Excellence are part of a growing national advocacy movement to educate the public as well as litigants, lawmakers, judges, and social service providers about the need for comprehensive family court reform. The Center for Judicial Excellence and their allies worked with California State Senator Mark Leno and others to pass an audit request through the state legislature last July. The California State Auditor is currently investigating the use of court appointees in family courts because of growing evidence that children are being harmed there. The California Legislature is slated to consider additional family court reform bills being presented by the Center and the California Protective Parents Association in the coming months.
"We must assess what's happening in our family courts, and that's why I've requested a state audit to take a hard look at the performance and effectiveness of the family court system,'' said Assemblymember Beall.
The State Auditor's report about the California Family Courts has an expected release date of June 2010.
NCADV - The Mission of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) is to organize for collective power by advancing transformative work, thinking and leadership of communities and individuals working to end the violence in our lives.
CJE - The Center for Judicial Excellence (CJE) was established to improve the judiciary's public accountability and strengthen and maintain the integrity of the courts. CJE has made a special commitment to protect the rights of children and other vulnerable populations in the courts.
1346 4th Street | San Rafael, CA | 94901
Main 415.459.9211 | Fax 415.459.9210
Telling Stories, Moving Mountains
Technorati Tags: NCADV,RELEASE,Courts,IMMEDIATE,February,Contacts,Rita,Smith,Russell,Young,Dads,Past,Massive,System,Failure,RAFAEL,National,advocacy,trend,children,Bekm,father,Nicholas,Bacon,Meridian,Idaho,Wyatt,Stephen,Garcia,Bernardino,Details,judges,requests,orders,reports,death,threats,text,messages,Facebook,Katie,Tagle,California,Assemblymember,Beall,Bill,Numerous,protection,addition,Leadership,Council,Child,Abuse,Interpersonal,Violence,America,Across,science,Executive,Director,Coalition,Against,Domestic,disbelief,Judge,David,Mazurek,custody,advantage,attitude,danger,Center,Judicial,Excellence,member,movement,allies,State,Senator,Mark,Leno,legislature,Auditor,Protective,Parents,Association,performance,June,Mission,individuals,judiciary,commitment,rights,Street,Main,AREA,Infants,theories,fathers,biases,transcripts,lawmakers,providers,Mountains,month,women,centerforjudicialexcellence


text:
- Home
- Jpop
- L'Arc~En~Ciel
- Niji (Album Version) - Rainbow
Niji (Album Version)
Original / Romaji Lyrics | English Translation |
Togiresou na hodo toumei na koe ni Aruki-dashita sono hitomi e Hateshinai mirai ga tsuzuite 'ru | to the unalloyed voice almost deserting To my dear who have just started walking, neever ended future is eternal |
Dare mo ga hibiwarete iru Furidashita ame ni nurete Kimi wa mata tachidomatte shimau kedo Shinjite kureru kara | everybody get hurt (cracked). I get wet by the just come on rain and you halt up again, but you still be faithful to me |
Kagayaki wo atsume hikari wo motomeru Moetsukite mo kamawanai sa Subete wa shinjitsu to tomo ni aru | I'm gathering the brightness seek for the lights If I burn out, it's all very fine Everything is with a truth. |
Sonna sekai nante mou nani mo mitaku nai yo Nani mo! Nani mo! Nani mo! | that way I don't want see anything Anything, anything, anything! |
Kisetsu ga nagarete ite mo... Me wo tojite itsu mo mite 'ta fuukei no you ni Nando me ga ame mo agatta | even the season goes by Close my eyes and always think of you as scenery Any number of times rain has been stopped |
Naze kono mune kara ai wa umarete iku? Sakimidareta hana wa yurete Shizunda daichi ni furisosogu | Why love is born of my heart Blooming flowers are swinging it comes down to dusky mother earth that is love |
Togiresou na hodo toumei na koe ni Aruki-dashita sono hitomi e Owaranai mirai wo sasageyou | to the unalloyed voice almost deserting To my dear who have just started walking, I'll tribute never ended future |
labyrinth to heart | labyrinth to heart |
In 1997, Sakura was arrested for illegal drug use. L'Arc-en-Ciel's career came to a halt. L'Arc-en-Ciel was come back with this song from the halt. So, this song is said the lyric may be related to the issue.
Transliterated by Shinobi Chirlind-Byouko
Translated by papi2y
See an error in these lyrics? Let us know here!
Animelyrics.com now has an OpenSearch plugin that you can install into your browser (FireFox, Chrome and IE/Edge supported)
My Little Pony Ties
Lyrics copyright to their respective owners or translators. No copyright infringment is intended or implied.
Layout and other content copyright Anime Lyrics dot Com / Anime Globe Productions
This is some text here


text:
Table of Contents
The rewrite of this tutorial document with updated contents and more practical examples is available as Guide for Debian Maintainers. Please use this new tutorial as the primary tutorial document.
Let's start by creating a package of your own (or, even better, adopting an existing one).
If you are making a Debian package with an upstream program, the typical workflow of Debian package building involves generating several specifically named files for each step as follows:
Get a copy of the upstream software, usually in a compressed tar format.
Add Debian-specific packaging modifications to the upstream program under the
directory, and create a non-native source package
(that is, the set of input files used for Debian package building) in
3.0 (quilt)
Build Debian binary packages, which are ordinary installable package files in .deb
format (or .udeb
format, used by the Debian Installer) from the Debian source package.
Please note that the character separating
was changed from
(hyphen) in the tarball name to
(underscore) in the Debian package filenames.
In the file names above, replace
part with the package name,
the package
part with the upstream version,
the version
part with the Debian revision,
and the revision
part with the package architecture,
as defined in the Debian Policy Manual.
Each step of this outline is explained with detailed examples in later sections.
You have probably chosen the package you want to create. The first thing you need to do is check if the package is in the distribution archive already by using the following:
the aptitude command
the Debian packages web page
the Debian Package Tracker web page
If the package already exists, well, install it! :-) If it happens to be orphaned (that is, if its maintainer is set to Debian QA Group), you may be able to pick it up if it's still available. You may also adopt a package whose maintainer has filed a Request for Adoption (RFA).[6]
There are several package ownership status resources:
The wnpp-alert command from the devscripts
Debian Bug report logs: Bugs in pseudo-package wnpp
in unstable
As a side note, it's important to point out that Debian already has packages for most kinds of programs, and the number of packages already in the Debian archive is much larger than that of contributors with upload rights. Thus, contributions to packages already in the archive are far more appreciated (and more likely to receive sponsorship) by other developers [7]. You can contribute in various ways:
taking over orphaned, yet actively used, packages
joining packaging teams
triaging bugs of very popular packages
preparing QA or NMU uploads
If you are able to adopt the package, get the sources (with something like
apt-get source
) and
examine them. This document unfortunately doesn't include comprehensive
information about adopting packages. Thankfully you shouldn't have a hard time
figuring out how the package works since someone has already done the initial
setup for you. Keep reading, though; a lot of the advice below will still be
applicable to your case.
If the package is new, and you decide you'd like to see it in Debian, proceed as follows:
First, you must know that the program works, and have tried it for some time to confirm its usefulness.
You must check that no one else is already working on the package on the
Work-Needing and Prospective Packages site.
If no one else is working on it, file an ITP (Intent
To Package) bug report to the wnpp
pseudo-package using reportbug. If someone's already on it,
contact them if you feel you need to. If not — find another interesting
program that nobody is maintaining.
The software must have a license.
For the main
section, Debian Policy requires it
to be fully compliant with the Debian Free Software
Guidelines (DFSG)
and not to require a package outside of
for compilation or execution. This
is the desired case.
For the contrib
section, it must comply with the
DFSG but it may require a package outside of main
compilation or execution.
For the non-free
section, it may be non-compliant
with the DFSG but it must be distributable.
If you are unsure about where it should go, post the license text on email@example.com and ask for advice.
The program should not introduce security and maintenance concerns into the Debian system.
The program should be well documented and its code needs to be understandable (i.e., not obfuscated).
You should contact the program's author(s) to check if they agree with packaging it and are amicable to Debian. It is important to be able to consult with the author(s) in case of any problems with the program, so don't try to package unmaintained software.
The program certainly should not run setuid root, or even better, it shouldn't need to be setuid or setgid to anything.
The program should not be a daemon, or go in an
directory, or open a port as root.
Of course, the last one is just a safety measure, and is intended to save you from enraging users if you do something wrong in some setuid daemon… When you gain more experience in packaging, you'll be able to package such software.
As a new maintainer, you are encouraged to get some experience in packaging with easier packages and discouraged from creating complicated packages.
Simple packages
single binary package, arch = all (collection of data such as wallpaper graphics)
single binary package, arch = all (executables written in an interpreted language such as POSIX shell)
Intermediate complexity packages
single binary package, arch = any (ELF binary executables compiled from languages such as C and C++)
multiple binary packages, arch = any + all (packages for ELF binary executables + documentation)
upstream source in a format other than tar.gz
or tar.bz2
upstream source containing undistributable contents
High complexity packages
interpreter module package used by other packages
generic ELF library package used by other packages
multiple binary packages including an ELF library package
source package with multiple upstream sources
kernel module packages
kernel patch packages
any package with non-trivial maintainer scripts
Packaging high complexity packages is not too hard, but it requires a bit more knowledge. You should seek specific guidance for every complex feature. For example, some languages have their own sub-policy documents:
There is another old Latin saying: fabricando fit faber
(practice makes perfect). It is highly recommended to
practice and experiment with all the steps of Debian packaging with simple packages
while reading this tutorial. A trivial upstream tarball,
, created as follows may offer
a good starting point:[8]
$ mkdir -p hello-sh/hello-sh-1.0; cd hello-sh/hello-sh-1.0 $ cat > hello <<EOF #!/bin/sh # (C) 2011 Foo Bar, GPL2+ echo "Hello!" EOF $ chmod 755 hello $ cd .. $ tar -cvzf hello-sh-1.0.tar.gz hello-sh-1.0
So the first thing to do is to find and download the original source code.
Presumably you already have the source file that you picked up at the
author's homepage. Sources for free Unix programs usually come in
tar+gzip format with the extension
tar+bzip2 format with the extension
, or
tar+xz format with the extension
. These usually contain a directory called
with all the sources inside.
If the latest version of the source is available through a Version Control System
(VCS) such as Git, Subversion, or CVS, you need to get it with git
, svn co
, or cvs co
repack it into tar+gzip format yourself
by using the --exclude-vcs
If your program's source comes as some other sort of archive (for instance, the
filename ends in .Z
[9]), you should also unpack it with the
appropriate tools and repack it.
If your program's source comes with some contents which do not comply with
DFSG, you should also unpack it to remove such contents and repack it with a
modified upstream version containing dfsg
As an example, I'll use a program called gentoo, a GTK+ file manager. [10]
Create a subdirectory under your home directory named
or deb
or anything you find
appropriate (e.g. just ~/gentoo
would do fine in this
case). Place the downloaded archive in it, and extract it (with tar
xzf gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
). Make sure there are no warning
messages, even irrelevant ones, because other
people's unpacking tools may or may not ignore these anomalies, so they
may have problems unpacking them. Your shell command line may look
something like this:
$ mkdir ~/gentoo ; cd ~/gentoo
$ wget http://www.example.org
$ tar xvzf gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
$ ls -F
Now you have another subdirectory, called gentoo-0.9.12
Change to that directory and thoroughly read the provided
documentation. Usually there are files named README*
, *.lsm
. You must find instructions on how to
compile and install the program (most probably they'll assume you want to
install to the /usr/local/bin
directory; you won't be doing
that, but more on that later in Section 3.3, "Installation of files to their destination").
You should start packaging with a completely clean (pristine) source directory, or simply with freshly unpacked sources.
Simple programs usually come with a Makefile
and can
be compiled just by invoking make
.[11] Some of them support
make check
, which runs included self-tests. Installation
to the destination directories is usually done with make
Now try to compile and run your program, to make sure it works properly and doesn't break something else while it's installing or running.
Also, you can usually run make clean
(or better
make distclean
) to clean up the build directory. Sometimes
there's even a make uninstall
which can be used to remove
all the installed files.
A lot of free software programs are written in the C and
C++ languages. Many of these use Autotools or
CMake to make them portable across different platforms. These build tools need
to be used to generate the Makefile
and other
required source files first. Then, such programs are built using the usual
make; make install
Autotools is the GNU build
system comprising Autoconf,
Libtool, and
gettext. You can recognize
such sources by the configure.ac
, and Makefile.in
The first step of the Autotools workflow is usually that upstream runs
autoreconf -i -f
in the source directory and
distributes the generated files along with the source.
configure.ac-----+-> autoreconf -+-> configure Makefile.am -----+ | +-> Makefile.in src/Makefile.am -+ | +-> src/Makefile.in | +-> config.h.in automake aclocal aclocal.m4 autoheader
Editing configure.ac
and Makefile.am
files requires some knowledge of autoconf and
automake. See info autoconf
info automake
The second step of the Autotools workflow is usually that the user obtains this
distributed source and runs ./configure && make
the source directory to compile the program into an executable command
Makefile.in -----+ +-> Makefile -----+-> make -> binary
src/Makefile.in -+-> ./configure -+-> src/Makefile -+
config.h.in -----+ +-> config.h -----+
config.status -+
config.guess --+
You can change many things in the Makefile
; for
instance you can change the default location for file installation
using the option ./configure --prefix=/usr
Although it is not required, updating the configure
other files with autoreconf -i -f
may improve
the compatibility of the source.
CMake is an alternative
build system. You can recognize such sources by the
If the upstream source comes as gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
, you can
take gentoo
as the (source) package name
and 0.9.12
as the upstream version.
These are used in the debian/changelog
file described later in
Section 4.3, "changelog
", too.
Although this simple approach works most of the time, you may need to adjust package name and upstream version by renaming the upstream source to follow Debian Policy and existing convention.
You must choose the package name
to consist only of lower case letters (a-z
), digits
), plus (+
) and minus
) signs, and periods (.
). It must be
at least two characters long, must start with an alphanumeric character, and
must not be the same as existing packages.
It is a good idea to keep its length within 30 characters.
If upstream uses some generic term such as test-suite
its name, it is a good idea to rename it to identify its contents explicitly and avoid namespace pollution.
You should choose the upstream version
to consist only of
alphanumerics (0-9A-Za-z
), plus signs (+
tildes (~
), and periods (.
). It must
start with a digit (0-9
). [16]
It is good idea to keep its length within 8 characters if possible.
If upstream does not use a normal versioning scheme such as
but uses some kind of date such as
, a random codename string, or a VCS hash value as part
of the version, make sure to remove them from the
upstream version. Such information can be
recorded in the debian/changelog
file. If you need to
invent a version string, use the YYYYMMDD
format such as
as upstream version. This ensures that
dpkg interprets later versions correctly as upgrades.
If you need to ensure smooth transition to the normal version scheme such as
in the future, use the 0~YYMMDD
such as 0~110429
as the upstream version.
Version strings [18] can be compared using dpkg(1) as follows:
$ dpkg --compare-versionsver1
The version comparison rule can be summarized as:
Strings are compared from the head to the tail.
Letters are larger than digits.
Numbers are compared as integers.
Letters are compared in ASCII code order.
There are special rules for period
), plus (+
), and tilde
) characters, as follows:
One tricky case occurs when upstream releases
as the
pre-release of gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
. You need to make
sure that the upgrade works properly by renaming the upstream source to
Set up the shell environment variables $DEBEMAIL
so that various Debian maintenance
tools recognize your email address and name to use for packages. [19]
$ cat >>~/.bashrc <<EOF DEBEMAIL="email@example.com" DEBFULLNAME="Firstname Lastname" export DEBEMAIL DEBFULLNAME EOF $ . ~/.bashrc
Normal Debian packages are non-native Debian packages made from upstream
programs. If you wish to create a non-native Debian package of an upstream
source gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
, you can create an initial
non-native Debian package for it by issuing the dh_make
command as follows:
$ cd ~/gentoo $ wget http://example.org/gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz $ tar -xvzf gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz $ cd gentoo-0.9.12 $ dh_make -f ../gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz
Of course, replace the filename with the name of your original source archive. [20] See dh_make(8) for details.
You should see some output asking you what sort of package you want
to create. Gentoo is a single binary package — it creates only one binary package, i.e.,
one .deb
file — so we will select the first option
(with the s
key), check the information on the screen, and
confirm by pressing
This execution of dh_make creates a copy of the upstream
tarball as gentoo_0.9.12.orig.tar.gz
in the
parent directory to accommodate the creation of the non-native Debian source
package with the name debian.tar.gz
$ cd ~/gentoo ; ls -F gentoo-0.9.12/ gentoo-0.9.12.tar.gz gentoo_0.9.12.orig.tar.gz
Please note two key features of this filename
Package name and version are separated by the character _
The string .orig
is inserted before the
You should also notice that many template files are created in the source under
the debian
directory. These will be explained in
Chapter 4, Required files under the debian
directory and Chapter 5, Other files under the debian
directory. You should also understand
that packaging cannot be a fully automated process. You will need to modify the upstream
source for Debian (see Chapter 3, Modifying the source). After this, you need to
use the proper methods for building Debian packages (Chapter 6, Building the package),
testing them (Chapter 7, Checking the package for errors), and uploading them (Chapter 9, Uploading the package).
All the steps will be explained.
If you accidentally erased some template files while working on them, you can
recover them by running dh_make with the
option again in a Debian package source tree.
Updating an existing package may get complicated since it may be using older techniques. While learning the basics, please stick to creating a fresh package; further explanations are given in Chapter 8, Updating the package.
Please note that the source file does not need to contain any build system
discussed in Section 2.4, "Simple build systems" and Section 2.5, "Popular portable build systems". It
could be just a collection of graphical data, etc. Installation of files may be
carried out using only debhelper
files such as debian/install
Section 5.11, "install
[4] For the older style of non-native Debian source packages in 1.0
is used instead. package
[5] See 5.6.1 "Source", 5.6.7 "Package", and 5.6.12 "Version". The package architecture follows the Debian Policy Manual, 5.6.8 "Architecture" and is automatically assigned by the package build process.
[7] Having said that, there will of course always be new programs that are worth packaging.
[8] Do not worry about the missing
. You can install the hello
command by simply using debhelper as in
Section 5.11, "install
", or by modifying the upstream source to add a new
with the install
target as in
Chapter 3, Modifying the source.
[9] You can identify the archive format using the file command when the file extension is not enough.
[10] This program is already packaged. The current version uses Autotools as its build structure and is substantially different from the following examples, which were based on version 0.9.12.
Many modern programs come with a script named configure
, which
when executed creates a Makefile
customized for
your system.
[12] Autotools is too big to deal with in this small tutorial. This
section is meant to provide keywords and references only. Please make sure to read the
Autotools Tutorial and
the local copy of /usr/share/doc/autotools-dev/README.Debian.gz
if you need to use it.
[13] You can automate this by using
See Section 4.4.3, "Customization of rules
[14] The default package name field length of aptitude is 30. For more than 90% of packages, the package name is less than 24 characters.
[15] If you follow the Debian Developer's Reference 5.1. "New packages", the ITP process will usually catch this kind of issue.
[16] This stricter rule should help you avoid confusing file names.
[17] The default version field length of aptitude is 10. The Debian revision with preceding hyphen usually consumes 2. For more than 80% of packages, the upstream version is less than 8 characters and the Debian revision is less than 2 characters. For more than 90% of packages, the upstream version is less than 10 characters and the Debian revision is less than 3 characters.
[18] Version strings may be
upstream version
Debian revision
), or
See Section 8.1, "New Debian revision" for how the
Debian revision is incremented.
[19] The
following text assumes you are using Bash as your login shell. If you use
some other login shell such as Z shell, use their corresponding
configuration files instead of ~/.bashrc
[20] If the upstream source provides the
directory and its contents, run the
dh_make command with the extra option
. The new source 3.0 (quilt)
format is
robust enough not to break even for these packages. You may need to update the contents
provided by the upstream version for your Debian package.
[21] There are several choices here: s
Single binary package, i
for arch-Independent package, m
Multiple binary packages, l
for Library package, k
Kernel module package, n
for kernel patch package, and b
for cdbs
package. This document focuses on the
use of the dh command (from the package
) to create a single binary package,
but also touches on how to use it for arch-independent or
multiple binary packages. The package
offers an alternative packaging script
infrastructure to the dh command and is outside the scope of
this document.